The adequate application of Building Information modeling (BIM) in sustainable building design known as green BIM, ensures the exchange of accurate information to reduce the buildings' carbon emissions and enhance the overall sustainability performance. However, a major challenge in sustainable building design is the persistent exchange of inaccurate data, resulting in flawed decisions. This study develops a Green BIM Process Model to explicitly guide the multidiscipline team to use the diverse BIM software to efficiently exchange cumbersome sustainability information. The process model focuses on building massing; fabric and layout optimization; and mechanical electrical & plumbing systems. After a critical literature review, the major components of efficient information exchange in the BIM-based sustainable building design process were established. Then, an in-depth interview was conducted with 26 construction professionals and analyzed using the narrative analysis technique. As a result, the best practices for the holistic coordination of the established major components were ascertained. Afterward, the Green BIM Process Model was developed by using Integrated DEFinition techniques to explicitly model the relationship between the established major components. The novel Green BIM Process Model provides a pragmatic approach that defines how the multidiscipline team can exchange accurate information and in turn, make viable decisions that can enhance the sustainability performance of buildings.
Research Article
The Green BIM Process Model for Efficient Information Exchange in Sustainable Building Design
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3134091/v1
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License
Version 1
posted
You are reading this latest preprint version
Sustainable Buildings
BIM
Process Model
Multidiscipline team
Information exchange
Sustainable or green buildings are developed following eco-friendly principles necessary to reduce the buildings' carbon emissions and enhance the overall sustainability performance. Several sustainable building rating tools (SBRTs) have been established to address high carbon emissions of buildings, such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), Malaysian Carbon Reduction and Environmental Sustainability Tool (MyCREST), etc. (BRE 2023; USGBC 2023; JKR and CIDB, 2017). However, the cumbersome sustainability criteria of SBRTs add an extra dimension of complexity to the heterogeneous and non-linear process of sustainable building design (Wu et al., 2023). Building Information Modelling (BIM) emerged as the central repository for exchanging digital building data in a single environment, thereby enabling the multidiscipline team to assess and compare different parameters to make viable decisions (Lu et al., 2017). Adequate execution of BIM in the green building known as green BIM ensures the use the diverse domain software to simulate building performance and collaboratively communicate cumbersome sustainability information to make decisions that will help reduce the buildings' environmental impact (Stride, et al., 2020). However, a major challenge in applying BIM methodology in sustainable building design is the persistent exchange of inaccurate data, resulting in flawed decisions (Cascone, 2023).
This has prompted several studies on green BIM which are categorized into 3 in this study. The first category of studies on green BIM: Cheng and Das (2014); Lai et al., (2019); Seghier, et al., (2022); Marzouk and Thabet (2023); and Shen and Pan (2023) focus on the technological aspect of software customization for decision making. Although the customized BIM software empowers design teams to enhance the performance of green building design, the practical implementation of these proposed tools in the industry has been hindered by the neglect of specific green BIM information exchange components necessary to facilitate their application (Zanni et al., 2020). The second category of green BIM research investigated individual components of green BIM. Precisely, Semaan et al., (2021) proposed continuous training to enhance the competency of the multidiscipline design team in green BIM application. Razmi et al., (2022), emphasize the integration of institutions to provide incentives and policy mandates that facilitate green BIM practices application. Kamari et al. (2019) highlighted the need for timely identification of critical decision points. Wu et al. (2023) suggested the need to clearly define deliverables.
Nevertheless, none of the studies have modeled holistically, the critical components of information exchange in green BIM practices (Wu et al., 2023). Modeling the building design process creates a standard that facilitates collaboration and timely delivery of reliable information for the execution of resource-efficient buildings (Ohueri et al, 2022). A few attempts have been made to model the green BIM process. For example, Wu & Issa, (2015) developed a BIM-LEED integrated process model to actualize the targeted LEED rating. The study focused on LEED projects and core information exchange components were not adequately considered. Kamari et al. (2017) developed a sustainability building retrofitting process model to support decision-making during the project’s lifecycle, which is beyond the scope of this research. Zanni et al., (2020) developed a BIM-based process model for BREEAM projects. The study focused on BREEAM projects but provides the basis for further inclusion of other vital green BIM components. Although an integrated design process (IDP) was adopted, none of the studies modeled the interdependencies of the core components of information exchange in the green BIM process (Martínez-Camacho et al., 2023).
Thus, the construction industry remains fragmented, primarily caused by the lack of collaboration among practitioners (Kim et al., 2020). This results in a situation where the industry tends to exhibit a "lonely" BIM level 1 maturity, rather than the desired cooperative BIM level 2 maturity that is recommended in the BIM standard (Zahedi et al., 2022). According to Zanni et al. (2020), this can be identified as the main factor contributing to the performance gap that exists between the simulated sustainability performance of buildings and their actual operational sustainability performance. To close the gap, this study develops a Green BIM Process Model to explicitly guide the multidiscipline team to use the diverse BIM software to efficiently exchange cumbersome sustainability information. Considering the wide scope of green BIM. the process model focuses on building massing; fabric and layout optimization; and mechanical electrical & plumbing systems. Besides, BIM standards like ISO 19650 1&2 are used as benchmarks for developing the green BIM Process Model. The sustainability criteria embedded in the process model is the MyCREST Design criteria due to the capacity to reduce carbon emissions and enhance the sustainability performance of buildings from pre-design to the maintenance and operation stage. The novel Green BIM Process Model provides a pragmatic approach that defines how the multidiscipline team can exchange accurate information and in turn, make viable decisions that can enhance the sustainability performance of buildings.
Green buildings provide 3 major benefits: economic benefits like reducing operating costs; environmental benefits such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions and conservation of resources; and social benefits that require the enhancement of the comfort and health of occupants (wgbc.org). Sustainable building rating tools (SBRTs) were established to measure the sustainability performance throughout the buildings’ life cycle to create an eco-friendly built environment (Wu et al., 2023). In the United States, LEED was developed to address sustainability issues of buildings in arctic, alpine, and tropical climates. BREEAM is used to assess the sustainability performance of buildings in temperate climates like the United Kingdom. Green Star South Africa, MyCREST, etc. were established to address the high carbon emission of buildings in tropical climates.
Ayarkwa et al., (2022), suggested that the first approach to sustainability practices is to convince the client and other stakeholders of the ensuing benefits of adopting sustainable building practices. Also, the need for adopting Integrated Design Process (IDP) was emphasized. Furthermore, the importance of ascertaining the cost of going “green” is paramount and cannot be overlooked (JKR and CIDB, 2017). key principles of sustainable building design emphasize the selection of brownfield land for sustainable building development (Lyu et al., 2023). González, et al., (2010) reiterated the need for site optimization via windmills and solar energy, to reduce the dependency on fossil fuel-derived energy. Then, passive design strategies such as the selection of building orientation to face solar south, and building mass to be elongated east-west can be used to maximize natural ventilation (Krygiel and Nies, 2008). Additionally, to lower embodied carbon and enhance occupants' health, it is recommended to use materials with low levels of volatile organic compounds (VOC). Notably, the lowering operational carbon category supports the installation of eco-friendly and resource-efficient mechanical, electrical & plumbing systems with a low carbon footprint (Srivastava et al., 2017). Then, water conservation strategies ought to be applied to maximize the catchment area, so that rainwater can be collected in cisterns, and barrels (Ding et al., 2018),
According to Wu et al., (2023), the development of a sustainable building must be guided by a rating tool. As a major component of sustainable building design, the choice of SBRT depends on the targeted performance of the building, climate conditions, and cultural values. Unlike other SBRTs, MyCREST guides stakeholders towards best practices of reducing embodied and operation carbon emissions and enhancing the sustainability performance of buildings from pre-design to the maintenance and operation stage (JKR and CIDB 2017). Therefore, though not limited to a particular SBRT, MyCREST criteria were used in the development of the green BIM process model. Notwithstanding, the overarching sustainability criteria of rating tools criteria of SBRTs add an extra dimension of complexity to the heterogeneous and non-linear process of sustainable building design (Wu et al., 2023). Thus, to adequately execute sustainable buildings, it is paramount to implement digital technology like BIM, among other components (Lu et al., 2017).
Information communication is the activity of conveyance, exchange, and transmission of information from sender to receiver, ranging from simple ideas to highly comprehensive data (Minango et al., 2023). In the construction context, adequate communication is required to effectively handle the extensive information exchange among the multidiscipline team (Senaratne et al., 2016). However, communication in the construction industry is characterized by a lot of issues because of complex organizational structures, fragmented supply chains, and the involvement of project teams from diverse disciplines (Lai, et al., 2019; Wu and Issa 2015). BIM has emerged as a collection of interrelated policies, procedures, and technologies that provide a framework for effectively managing vital building data in a digital format throughout the entire lifespan of a building (Succar, 2009). The BIM platform empowers designers to make modifications to building components within a unified model, ensuring that any changes are automatically reflected across all relevant views and deliverables (Lu et al., 2017). BIM implementation in sustainable building design, known as the green BIM, provides ideal leverage to significantly enhance the multidiscipline team collaborative exchange of overarching sustainability information, and eventual delivery of high-quality design on time and within budget (Lai, et al., 2019).
Nevertheless, the multidiscipline design team - a collection of people from different disciplines and organizations, finds it difficult to adequately implement the heterogeneous BIM methodology including software systems to seamlessly exchange information during the process of sustainable building design (Lu et al., 2017; Zanni et al., 2020; Chandran and Joseph, 2023). This is the major cause of the persistent exchange of inaccurate data, resulting in flawed decisions (Wu et al., 2015; Brisco et al., 2020; Manzoor, et al., 2021). Liu et al. (2021); Zanni et al., (2020) postulated that adequate implementation of BIM in the sustainable building process requires the critical evaluation of existing literature, to identify the main components that can harness the expertise of the competent multidiscipline team to efficiently utilize the available technology enablers such as BIM authoring tool and related performance analysis software to exchange accurate information and collaboratively execute projects with reduced carbon emission. Therefore, this study critically reviews previous studies, to establish the fundamental components for facilitating collaborative communication of information in the BIM-based sustainable building design process. The summary of the review is presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Components for Collaborative Information Exchange in BIM-Based Sustainable Building Design Process
Table 1 presents a non-exhaustive review of previous studies on the implementation of BIM in the sustainable building development process.
As shown in Table 1, Succar (2009) identified generic components of BIM: process, technology, and policy with no emphasis on sustainability. Wu and Isaa (2014) suggested the application of technology and process components for information exchange in a BIM-based LEED project. Waterhouse & Philp, (2016), focused on institutional support for the effective implementation of the BIM process in green building design. Kamari et al. (2019) looked at the critical decision points for the application of BIM in the delivery of sustainable building projects. Zanni et al. (2020), stated that the deliverables are critical to BIM execution in sustainable building in humid climates. Succar and Poirier (2020) built upon existing conceptual constructs to establish an information communication technology module for the management of building data. Ohueri et al. (2018) explored the potential of integrating MyCREST into BIM for the design of low-carbon buildings in the tropics. Doan et al. (2023) focused on green building rating tools as a vital component of green BIM.
However, none of the studies holistically considered the primary components for facilitating the collaborative exchange of accurate information during the execution of BIM in the sustainable building design process (Martínez-Camacho et al., 2023; Wu et al., 2023). Thus, after a review of previous studies on green BIM summarised in Table 1, this study established the 6 major components that are critical for collaborative communication and efficient information exchange in BIM-based sustainable building design. These include Competency and Training, Sustainable Building Rating Tool (MyCREST), Deliverables & Information Requirements, Technology and Enablers, Institutional Support, and Critical Decision Points. To establish optimal relationships and interdependencies of sustainable building components, Kazemi et al. (2022) opined that a well-articulate process model is key. Thus, this study evaluates the state-of-the-art practices of green BIM process modeling.
Modeling the building design creates a standard process for defining the critical functions, emphasizing important information, relationships, and elements essential for collaboration and timely delivery of building design (Wu and Issa 2015; Li et al., 2019). Due to the heterogeneous nature of BIM-based sustainable building design, an Integrated Design Process (IDP) is required to provide ideal synergies between the interdependencies of the building design elements and to formally articulate the roles and responsibilities of the diverse design team (Kamari et al. 2017; Zanni et al., 2020). Modeling the BIM-based sustainable building design process requires strict compliance with BIM standards and guides, sustainability criteria, project aims, and building regulations, among others (Liu et al., 2018). As stipulated in the BIM Project Execution Planning Guidelines (BIM PEPG) - a widely accepted BIM guide, it is of utmost importance to develop an iterative BIM execution plan at the early design stage to address the Employer’s Information Requirements (EIR); and adequately define the BIM Level of Development (LOD) & Level of Details (LOD), BIM deliverables, and information requirements (CIC 2010).
The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 19650 ISO series provides guidelines for using BIM to manage information throughout the life cycle of a built asset. ISO 19650-1 emphasizes the use of clear and concise language to ensure that information is easily understood by everyone involved; effective collaboration and adoption of a "one team" approach to encourage information sharing; development of a comprehensive information management plan from the outset of the project. On the other hand, ISO 19650-2 outlined best practices for information exchange during the delivery phase which include identifying the information requirements for each stage of the project and establishing the processes and procedures for delivering the information (BSI, 2023). In line with BIM standard ISO 19650 1&2, construction organizations must make sure that all design teams have attained BIM level 2 maturity to support information exchange inside a Common Data Environment (CDE). Unfortunately, BIM maturity levels in Malaysia's building sector range from 0 to 1, which is disappointing. This suggests that information interchange still takes place using conventional techniques rather than leverage on BIM's advantages (CIDB, 2017).
According to Zanni et al., (2020), best practices suggest that at the concept design phase, particularly when modeling the building massing, the heating and cooling load ought to be estimated while passive design strategies are applied. Afterward, critical decisions are made based on the evaluation of the analysis and reports. The multidiscipline design team ought to identify the needs of occupants and conduct analyses related to the selected sustainability criteria in the EIR and share in a CDE for the design team to review (Göçer et al., 2015; Ohueri et al., 2022). The significant aspect of the fabric and layout optimization is the detailed sustainability analysis such as ventilation and daylighting analysis, utilizing shading devices, and the selection of materials with minimal life-cycle environmental impacts (Gan et al., 2020). According to Kiamili et al., (2020), the configuration for the Mechanical, Electrical, & Plumbing (MEP) system requires the identification of energy sources and artificial lightning strategies, and the configuration of the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems. This should be on the detailed BIM LOD 200, then, the MEP Engineer assesses the report and makes critical decisions. The design is optimized, and the process is reiterated (Zanni et al., 2020). Additionally, the analysis requires the use of software with high interoperability to ensure that reliable information is exchanged.
Several studies have been conducted to model the complexity of the building development process. One of the widely adopted building process models is Integrated Design-Process Model (IDPM) established by Sanvido and Norton, (1994). IDPM represents the major functions, activities, flow of information, and knowledge that supports the building design process. However, Wu and Issa (2015) critiqued that IDPM did not define how the multi-discipline team can use emerging technologies like BIM authoring and parametric tools to exchange information. Geyer (2012) used the Systems Modelling Language (SysML) to establish the Parametric Systems Modelling (PSM) and proposed the integration of BIM to address the complexities of sustainable building development. Wu and Issa (2015) developed a BIM-integrated process model to help practitioners meet the unique sustainability criteria of LEEDS in the US. Kamari et al. (2017) developed a sustainability building retrofitting process model to support decision-making during the project’s lifecycle. Zanni et al., (2020), developed a green BIM process model to define the process of actualizing BREEAM criteria in the design of buildings in a temperature climate in the UK.
However, Mukkavaara (2021) believes that the building design process models developed over the past decades lack the adequacy to define how the multidisciplinary design team can apply diverse and emerging technology to exchange and manage information simultaneously. To date, there is a lack of an all-inclusive and well-articulated BIM-enabled process model to guide the multidiscipline team to use the diverse BIM software to efficiently exchange information, resulting in flawed decisions due to inaccurate data (Cascone, 2023). Thus, this study develops the green BIM process model that encompasses the fundamental green BIM components that can facilitate collaborative information exchange and iterative design of sustainable buildings; particularly for building massing; fabric and layout optimization; and mechanical electrical & plumbing systems.
The aim of this study is actualized using an iterative process of induction and deduction. First of all, a critical review of the related literature was carried out. Then, an in-depth interview was conducted with the construction professionals. The research process is illustrated in Fig. 1.
Figure 1 shows the process flow toward the development of the Green BIM Process Model
The first phase of actualizing the research aim is the critical review of related studies. A critical review is a powerful approach that applies rigor, transparency, and reproducibility to identify, analyze, and synthesize related secondary data to advance knowledge (Sekaran and Bougie, 2016). The critical review process of this study draws on the methodology adopted in other review articles, such as Lu et al., (2017); Melo et al., (2021). Studies related to green BIM were scrutinized and summarised in Table 1. The outcome of the critical literature review is the establishment of the major components of collaborative communication in the BIM-based sustainable building design process.
Then, the interpretivism paradigm was applied which is concerned with the qualitative approach. Specifically, a semi-structured in-depth interview was conducted with the research population, that is construction professionals to determine how best to coordinate the established components to facilitate collaborative communication among the diverse design team. The Convenient sampling technique (CST) was used to select 26 Interviewees from the research population. Apart from being a reliable technique, CST provides the interviewer with the opportunity to select respondents that are available, accessible, and willing to participate in the interview (Sekaran and Bougie, 2016). Also, Ohueri et al., (2022) asserted that at least 5 interviewees should participate in an in-depth interview.
The necessary ethics approval for this study was gotten from the Human Research Ethics Committee which permitted the researchers to conduct an interview, record, and store the interview data with the consent of the interviewees. The in-depth interview was conducted virtually considering the locations of the Interviewees, and limited resources to travel to various countries to conduct interviews. The interview data were analyzed via the narrative analysis technique. Although there are other qualitative approaches such as case study and phenomenology, this study adopted the narrative analysis approach because it allows the interviewees to narrate how the established green BIM collaborative components can be used to facilitate the exchange of accurate information in BIM-based sustainable building design practices, based on lessons learned in decades of construction practices. The interview stopped at the point when no new information was provided with respect to the research aim, in line with Sekaran and Bougie, 2016) emphasis on theoretical saturation/information redundancy.
Based on the established components, and the findings from the interview, the Green BIM Process Model was mapped using the Integrated Definition (IDEF) language. The logic behind the development of the Green BIM Process Model is that human beings and construction organizations are open systems that function based on input from the surroundings. IDEF0 and IDEF3 used in this study are the most appropriate languages for modeling a complex system like the construction organization processes (Mayer et al., 1995). the Green BIM Process Model was developed by mapping the interconnected relationships among various elements, including tasks, resources, data exchanges, interrelationships, timing, progression of events, and analytical decisions, that are essential for implementing BIM in the process of sustainable building design, especially for building massing; fabric and layout optimization; and mechanical electrical & plumbing systems. Best practices specified in BIM standards and guides were used as the benchmarks for the Green BIM Process Model. Moreover, MyCREST criteria were used as the sustainability certification or rating tool. Without a certification tool, a building cannot be certified as green (Wu and Issa 2015).
The IDEF0 model uses the ICOM (Input, Control, Output, and Mechanism) notation. The Input arrow enters the activity/function box from the left to generate an Output (Ohueri et al., 2022). The Output arrows leaving the box are also affected by the Control arrows that enter the box from the top. The Control arrows define the circumstances needed by the function box to deliver accurate outputs. The mechanism arrow that connects the bottom sides of the box represents the physical aspect of the activity including the people and the tools to be used to execute the task. The Mechanism arrows pointing upwards basically support the function box. Arrows that point downwards are commonly known as Call arrows, which facilitate the exchange of detailed information between different sections or components within the same model. However, IDEF0 has some obvious limitations, specifically, its inability to capture concurrent processes, information process flows, and time considerations (Zanni et al., 2020).
Therefore, IDEF3 was introduced to overcome the shortcomings of IDEF0. With the help of several viewpoints, IDEF3 records descriptions of the activity sequences and pinpoints key decision or process milestones (Mayer et al. 1995). The IDEF3 symbols represent real-world procedures and activities which are represented as Units of Behaviour (UOB). The arrows that connect the boxes indicate the order of several activities. The junctions represent restrictions and enable process division. The reasonable decisions include synchronous or nonsynchronous start and conclusion of the processes, AND (&), OR (O), and EXCLUSIVE-OR (X). The objects are shown as circles, each of which represents one of their states, connected by arrows, each of which has a UOB referent to denote the entry, transition, status, and departure conditions (Mayer et al., 1995).
First of all, via a critical evaluation of related literature, 6 main green BIM components for collaborative communication were established, namely: Competency and Training, Sustainable Building Rating Tools, Technology and Enablers, Deliverables & Information Requirements, Institutional Support, and Critical Decision Points (see Table 1). Afterward, the Interview data were analyzed using the incident narrative analysis technique. Narrative analysis is different from the conventional content analysis of interview data. According to Zanni et al. (2020), narrative analysis is an appropriate technique for interpreting texts or visual data that have a storied form. The narrative analysis enables the researcher to identify the patterns that emerge during the collaborative design of sustainable buildings and to model the BIM-based design process based on lessons learned (successes and failures) of best practices. The Interview was carried out in two phases. Phase one was used to determine the demography of the Interviewees.
6.1. Demographic Analysis
The demographic information of the Interviewees was sought. This is presented in Table 2.
| Number of Interviewees | Years of Experience | Project Role |
|---|---|---|
| Interviewees 1,2,3,4, &5 | Over 15 years | Architects |
| Interviewees 6,7,8, &9 | Over 20 years | Quantity Surveyors |
| Interviewees 10,11, &12 | Over 20 years | Construction Managers |
| Interviewees 13&14 | Over 30 years | BIM Coordinators/Managers |
| Interviewees 15,16, &17 | Over 10 years | BIM software Experts/MyBIM Trainers |
| Interviewees 18,19, &20 | 0ver 20 years | Sustainability Engineers/MyCREST Accessors |
| Interviewees 21,22, &23 | Over 20 years | Electrical Engineer |
| Interviewees 24,25, &26 | Over 20 years | Mechanical Engineer |
Table 2 shows the demographic analysis of the 26 interviewees. The findings ascertain that the appropriate, experienced, and knowledgeable interviewees have participated in the in-depth interview, thereby guaranteeing a valid response and quality output. Selecting experienced and well-informed interviewees enrich the research output (Sekaran and Bougie 2016).
In the second phase of the interview, the researcher discussed with the interviewees regarding the established main components for facilitating collaborative communication and then asked the interviewees to narrate the incidents that occur in applying these components to facilitate information exchange when executing BIM in the sustainable building design process. Due to the broad scope of green BIM, the interview scope was limited to building massing, fabric and layout optimization, and mechanical electrical & plumbing systems. The outcome of the narrative analysis of interview data is categorized into three main narratives as presented in the subsequent section.
6.2. Narrative Analysis A: Building Massing Development
First and foremost, the interviewees reached a consensus that a well-trained multidiscipline team is usually assembled and the competency in using diverse tools is assessed. Interviewee 10 (BIM Manager) stated that “the selection of competent multidiscipline design team and ensuring that the diverse BIM tools used to perform various tasks are interoperable is a must, otherwise, there will be misplacement of vital information.” Notably, the interviewees emphasized that the roles and responsibilities of the diverse team need to be clearly defined in line with the sustainability target of the project. According to Interviewee 20 (Sustainability Engineers), “New roles require proper understanding of how numerous BIM performance analysis tools can be used to assess environmental impact, and factors that affect human comfort.” Additionally, the Interviewees suggested that an adequate plan should be mapped for the execution of BIM, stating particularly the BIM use and information requirement. “This is where constant meetings come in, both virtual and face-to-face. Face-to-face cannot be eliminated, and we also recognize the use of emerging ICT which helps us to communicate conveniently and efficiently too.” As stated by Interviewee 16 (BIM software Expert).
Complex and dynamic simulation software is required to perform the initial assessment of climate and project site, to determine wind, light, and sun availability. Similarly, Interviewees18 (MyCREST Assessor) in his exact words, stated that “before the modeling of building massing, the infrastructure and carbon sequestration strategies ought to be incorporated to ensure that carbon emission is minimized. Such strategies include the definition of urban footprint, urban connectivity, use of low-emission transport systems, brownfield development, etc.” “He continued, the support of the government and other institutions is needed at this juncture, in terms of providing incentives and making policies that will attract occupants and community engagement. This will enable the decision-makers to make informed decisions.” The Interviewees suggested that after the preliminary assessment, then the Architect in collaboration with the core design team, should develop the initial building massing pending more detailed analysis. Interviewee 1, an Architect with more than a decade of industry practice cited that “the building massing of BIM LOD 100 should be developed, followed by a detailed analysis to optimize the developed model.”
The importance of Technology and Enablers was emphasized, as it will allow the multidiscipline team to conduct detailed analysis and collaboratively communication to actualize the targeted sustainability criteria. Interviewees suggested that a detailed analysis should be conducted to optimize the building massing. Particularly, Interviewee 25, a Mechanical Engineer with over 2 decades of experience postulated that “it is necessary to conduct detailed analysis such as sun and shadow analysis, solar radiation, estimate heating and cooling loads to enhance the indoor environmental quality.” Accordingly, Sustainability Engineer believes that sensitivity tests ought to be conducted to determine the heating and cooling loads associated with each modification to the building's shape intended to lower energy usage. In addition to that Interview 4 (Architect), highlighted the importance of passive design strategies along with simulations mentioned by the Mechanical engineer and Sustainability Engineer. Specifically, he stated that “a design loop should be created for the amendment of the building form, orientation, and location until the building mass is optimized Afterwards, “building performance analysis ought to be conducted by the core design team, with the Sustainability Engineer taking the lead as regards sustainability performance decisions”.
Interview 17 (BIM Software expert) and Interviewee 20 (Sustainability Engineering), and Interviewee 1 (Architect) reiterated that information gets more comprehensive and complex as the design progress. Interview 17 stated: “Even at the concept design stage, information being generated as the design progresses can be overwhelming at times, therefore, an automated tool should be developed using state-of-the-art technology, to automate tasks and help assess the sustainability performance of buildings.” The Interviewees agreed that after the detailed analysis, the project objective, along with the developed BIM plan is assessed and at that point, critical decisions are made, and reports are generated based on the outcome of the analysis. Upon approval by the Client or his representative, the BIM LOD 100 building massing is optimized with targeted sustainability criteria met. Once is approved, the layout ought to be optimized. After a series of interviews, a saturation point was reached as the Interviewees were repeating what others have said.
6.3. Narrative Analysis B: Fabric and Layout Optimisation
Optimization of layout and fabrics precisely requires specific tasks to achieve energy savings, minimize carbon emissions, lower billing expenses, and enhance occupants' comfort. According to Interviewee, 15, “Fabric performance ought to be optimized by adopting carbon reduction strategies.” Interviewees reached a consensus that MyCREST has great potential in reducing carbon emissions compared to other rating tools. Materials that minimize embodied carbon emission are recommended. Interviewee 7 (Quantity Surveyor) stated that it is necessary to also consider the cost of the materials and their life cycle cost. In his words: “In as much as we are focusing on sustainability, cost ought to be minimized as well.” The Interviewees narrated a situation where the fenestration of the façade is enhanced using shading. According to Interviewee 5 (Architect), “Optimization is an important aspect of building design, and the building mass should be a priority in terms of the shading sun away from the building.” The Interviewees agreed that the sizes of the fenestration, location of rooms, and U-Values of materials, are developed by the core design team such as the Architect, Sustainability Engineer, and BIM manager. Also, they emphasize that while optimizing the building mass, designers should ensure that the materials and process align with those stipulated in the targeted sustainability rating tool. This should be approved by the core design team and the client.
According to Interviewee 1 (Architect), “At each design phase, clients' approval is required for the design to progress.” Upon approval by the client, detailed optimization is followed via simulation for daylight analysis, natural ventilation, and strategies to reduce Overall Thermal Transfer Value (OTTV) and Roof Thermal Transfer Value (RTTV). This is usually done by the sustainability engineer who most times are architects. Particularly, Interviewee 24 suggested that “façade optimization should be done by conducting daylight analysis, evaluating natural ventilation potential, and heating and cooling loads. Afterward, models should be coordinated to detect clash.” The selection of building materials should adhere to specific criteria such as thermal performance and carbon footprint. According to Interviewee 12, “Utilizing green building materials not only decreases maintenance and operational expenses but also improves occupant health and productivity.” Additionally, the building is divided into thermal zones, which serve as the basis for evaluating and simulating its performance. Each thermal zone is defined by occupancy and operation schedules. According to Interviewee 14, “Iteration continues until the core design team reaches a consensus,” in this case, a consensus is at the critical decision point. The BIM coordinators and Construction managers suggest that client approval is needed, and in case the performance criteria are not met, the process ought to be repeated accordingly.
6.4. Narrative Analysis C: Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Configuration
The interviewees narrated the process of configuring the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) systems of the concept design of a sustainable building which is enabled by the BIM methodology. Accordingly, BIM standards 19650 1 & 2 and MyCREST criteria guided the MEP configuration. Strategies for the configuration of the HVAC services, artificial lighting, and renewable energy are set by the MEP Engineer along with the Architects and Sustainability Engineers and shared with the multidiscipline team for timely decision-making. Interview 1 stated that “decisions are made following 2 phases: hard gates and soft gates.” According to Interviewee 26, an Electrical Engineer, “the best practices of green BIM execution entails determining energy sources, developing artificial lighting strategy, the configuration of HVAC systems, and hot & cold-water supply.” Thus, detailed analysis is conducted for the MEP including energy performance, embodied and operational carbon emission, water conservation strategies, heating and cooling loads, waste reduction strategies, and cost estimation. According to Interviewee 24 (Electrical Engineer), “Amid all the strategies and simulations, building energy management plan need to be developed.”
Interviewee 9 suggests that “water conservation strategies should be applied following the building regulations and sustainability criteria of the targeted rating tools. A significant effort should be made to ensure that water is conserved, and the cost of developing drainage systems should be reduced to the minimum.” Alternative design strategies should be evaluated to reduce waste generation. According to Interviewee 14 (Construction Manager), “huge generation of waste is most time as a result of poor design which has resulted to rework, and this must be curtailed at the conceptual design phase or even earlier than that.” Interviewee 24 narrated that “the MEP model is built on the Architectural model and approved by the client”. As stated by Interviewee 13, “After the creation of BIM models for architecture, structure, mechanical, and plumbing, it is crucial to coordinate these models to identify and resolve clashes.” In this process, the MEP Engineer conducts a thorough simulation of the Architect's model and provides feedback. The resulting output is a coordinated LOD 200 BIM, which includes generalized placeholders that represent specific elements. In some cases, all requirements for MEP are not achieved. This stage requires a detailed analysis to ensure that the sustainability criteria are met. The iterative process continued until all the proposals are developed for LOD 200, and agreed, upon by the rest of the design team.
The narratives of the interviewees highlighted the importance of the major components of information exchange in green building design practices. Following the narratives of the interviewees and reference to the sustainability criteria (in this case, MyCREST) and BIM standards ISO 19650 1&2 as benchmarks, the Integrated DEFinition (IDEF) techniques were used to develop the green BIM Process Model by explicitly modeling the relationship between the established green BIM components for collaborative and effective information exchange. The detailed level decomposition of the models for building massing, layout and fabric optimization, MEP configuration, and concept design iteration is presented in the figures below.
The figures above show the developed novel green BIM Process Model. The information requirement for the developed model is provided in the Appendix of this study.
The novelty of the developed Green BIM Proces Model cannot be overstated. First and foremost, the developed process model encompasses the critical components that can facilitate the collaborative exchange of accurate information in the green BIM design. This corresponds with Martínez-Camacho et al., (2023) statement that developing a state-of-the-art BIM-oriented process model with necessary components, is required to address the heterogeneous nature of the green building design. The developed Green BIM Proces Model advocates that clients should be provided with proof of the benefits of green building design. This aligns with Ayarkwa et al., (2022) assertion that the clients and other stakeholders should be adequately convinced of the benefits of sustainable design practices. The competency and training of components of the developed model distinguish it from previous process models developed by Wu and Issa (2015); Kamari et al. (2017); Zanni et al. (2020), Ohueri et al., (2022), etc. This corresponds with Aibinu and Papadonikolaki, (2020) view that selecting a well-trained multidiscipline design team that is knowledgeable and competent in the use of BIM tools is needed to facilitate collaboration and information exchange. However, Zhao et al. (2022), postulated that the lack of training and competency of the diverse team remains a major hindrance to achieving digital sustainability in the construction sector. Thus, the competency and training component of the Green BIM Process Model provides the opportunity for the design team to constantly undergo training, as technology continues to advance.
The development of the model is guided by benchmarks like building regulations, BIM standards 19650 1&2, and sustainability criteria (MyCREST Design) which are a prerequisite for sustainable building design (Wu et al., 2023). Notably, the model is one of the first attempts to clearly define how BIM can be used to actualize MyCREST Design criteria, which is the epitome of reducing carbon emissions in the building and construction sector (JKR & CIDB, 2017). The key principles of sustainable building design were strictly considered as well. Specifically, carbon sequestration strategy including passive design strategies, as well as heating and cooling loads are projected in the developed model, which was suggested by Krygiel & Nies, (2008) as best practices. The novel Green BIM Process Model incorporates occupants' requirements into the design process. Ayarkwa et al., (2022); Bangwal et al., (2022) cited that engaging occupants and the community in the design process helps the design team to make informed decisions. Furthermore, the developed model emphasizes engagement and support from institutions like the government and the education sector. Semaan et al., (2021) posited that institutions can significantly promote the adoption of BIM in the sustainable building design process by training practitioners and providing monetary incentives. This is missing in other existing process models for green building design.
Although there was no consensus regarding the reconciliation of safety and sustainability objectives, the simultaneous consideration of sustainability and safety during the BIM-enabled green building design practices is recommended (Zanni et al., 2020). In Junction (J8) of Green BIM Process Model Fabric and Layout Optimization (Fig. 3), a consensus was reached on the design strategies required to enhance Indoor Environmental Quality. Krygiel and Nies, (2008) suggest the selection of materials with low levels of volatile organic compounds (VOC) as they are not harmful to the occupants. According to Ohueri et al., (2022), this is a vital approach to eliminating sick building syndrome (SBS). In line with Elgayar et al. (2016) assertion, the developed model obliges the Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing (MEP) Engineer to maximize energy use by installing eco-friendly and resource-efficient systems like occupancy sensors and light reduction controls. Also, water conservation and waste reduction strategies highlighted in the MyCREST Design were strictly adhered to (see Appendix for information requirements). According to Elgayar et al. (2016), maximizing the rainwater catchment area, among other strategies can help generate and conserve water. In the same vein, cost and time reduction are also critically considered to ensure the overall success of the design process (JKR and CIDB 2017).
According to ISO 19650, identifying decision points is a crucial phase in building design and this has been acknowledged in the developed Green BIM Process Model. To provide quality assurance that the sustainability objectives would be met, it is necessary to audit the soft-gates and hard-gate decision-making. According to Zanni et al., (2022), the hard gates require the stoppage of the entire design practice pending a review. On the other hand, soft gates require the continuation of the design process concurrently with the design review. Decision-making starts at the onset of the sustainable building design process. For example, though not explicit, decisions are taken on sustainability aspiration, cost, etc., from J1 (Fig. 2). The point at which the sustainable building design process may iterate is Junctions [X]. The UOB 2.1 decomposition indicates that upon completion of the "Build massing model" task (UOB 2.1.1), functions (UOBs) 2.1.2 to 2.1.6 can be initiated, although not necessarily concurrently. The Junction [&], (J3), and (J2), highlight this sequencing within the UOB 2.1 decomposition.
After the successful completion of all tasks, a comprehensive "Massing assessment report" is developed in PDF format. Junction J4 specifically relates to the sustainability criteria defined by the MyCREST Design guidelines. Prior to moving to the next phase of design, a consensus ought to be reached by the client and the core design team. In Junction (J8) of fabric and layout optimization (Fig. 3), a consensus was reached on the design strategies required to enhance Indoor Environmental Quality. The consensus could be in the form of a pdf report in Junction J8 and J10. Junctions J11 (Fig. 4) guarantees the coordination of iterations between the Architecture, Structural, and MEP BIM models. Junction J12 criteria encompass a comprehensive trade-off among all the MyCREST issues addressed in the previous junctions, while also establishing targets for the subsequent indicator. The decisions are made by the core design team, which includes the client, based on information derived from various sources such as 2D drawings, 3D models, the comprehensive sustainability report, and the cost estimate report. As viewed by Kamari et al. (2019) a reliable decision mechanism is required to actualize the design objectives. According to Razmi et al., (2022); Kamari et al. (2019) critical decisions are made based on sustainability criteria. However, when there is a lack of consensus, building regulation is prioritized over sustainability criteria. The iteration design process is illustrated in Fig. 5. Critical decisions are met at various Junctions from J14, J15, &J17. If the targeted sustainability criteria are not met, iteration continues.
7.2. Validation of the Green BIM Process Model
The need to validate research output has been highlighted by several scholars including Sekaran and Bougie (2016), even though there is no standard for validating research output. Thus, the developed Green BIM Process Model was validated by 2 Architects, 1 Electrical Engineer, 2 Mechanical engineers, 2 BIM Coordinators/Managers, 2 sustainability engineers, and 1 BIM software expert. The 10 Validators were part of the initial interview. According to Wu and Issa (2015), the essence of validating a research output by construction experts is to fundamentally establish trustworthiness, examine the completeness of the research output, and provide recommendations for further improvement. The Validators reached a consensus that the developed process model is noteworthy as it provides guidelines in view of the most critical aspects of sustainability at the concept design stage of building and enables the design team to collaboratively exchange reliable information and make critical decisions on time. According to Validator 1 (Architect), “The developed green BIM Process Model can help construction experts to adequately apply the diverse BIM tools to deliver the overarching sustainability criteria of rating tools”. The Validators cited that the developed process model is novel as it will simplify and promote the use of BIM in delivering cumbersome sustainability information. Besides, the rigor in the method of developing the Green BIM Process Model was highly commended by the Validators.
In practice, BIM has not been adequately executed in the sustainable building design process, resulting in poor information exchange synthesis. Thus, this study conducted a comprehensive literature review on state-of-the-art research in digital and sustainable building transformation. The review revealed that studies on green BIM did not cohesively consider the green BIM critical components when modeling the sustainable building design process. Hence, this study established the main components for the collaborative exchange of accurate information in BIM-based sustainable building design practices such as Competency and Training, Institutional Support, and Critical Decision Points, among others. Then, an in-depth interview was conducted with experienced construction stakeholders, to capture the scenario of implementing BIM in sustainable building design based on best practices. Following the narratives of the interviewees, sustainability criteria of ideal rating tools like MyCREST, and BIM standards such as ISO 19650 1&2, the Green BIM Process Model was developed.
The novel process model is a comprehensive and well-defined methodology that incorporates the use of BIM technology to facilitate effective communication and collaboration among multidisciplinary professionals. This model leverages their expertise and contributions throughout the entire lifecycle of sustainable building projects, enabling efficient planning and delivery processes. This is the epitome of facilitating information exchange, thereby enabling the design team to make viable decisions that can help minimize carbon emissions, enhance occupants' health, and accomplish the business and commercial objectives of sustainable tool ratings. Further study is required to extend the process model to other rating tools, other than MyCREST. Also, an automated tool is required to facilitate the implementation of the Green BIM Process Model.
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
- Ayarkwa, J., Opoku, D. G. J., Antwi-Afari, P., & Li, R. Y. M. (2022). Sustainable building processes’ challenges and strategies: The relative important index approach. Cleaner Engineering and Technology, 7, 100455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2022.100455
- Brisco, R., Whitfield, R.I. & Grierson, H. A novel systematic method to evaluate computer-supported collaborative design technologies. Res Eng Design 31, 53–81 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-019-00323-7
- BSI 19650 Building Information Modelling (BIM): Continually improve your standards in built environment. www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/iso-19650-BIM/
- Chandran, R., & Joseph, N. (2023). Information Flow in Reuse Prospects of Construction Materials: Analysis of information flow in the Swedish construction industry.
- Cheng, J. C., & Das, M. (2014). A BIM-based web service framework for green building energy simulation and code checking. Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 19(8), 150-168. http://www.itcon.org/2014/8
- CIC (2010), BIM Execution Planning Guide, Construction Industry Council, viewed 17 January 2019, <https://vdcscorecard.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/BIM_Project Execution Planning Guide-v2.0.pdf>.
- CIDB (2017), Malaysia Building Information Modelling, Construction Industry Development Board Malaysia, <http://www.cidb.gov.my/images/content/penerbitan-IBS/BIM-REPORT.pdf>. (Accessed 23 July 2022).
- Ding, Z., Zhu, M., Tam, V. W., Yi, G., & Tran, C. N. (2018). A system dynamics-based environmental benefit assessment model of construction waste reduction management at the design and construction stages. Journal of cleaner production, 176, 676-692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.101
- Gan, V. J., Lo, I. M., Ma, J., Tse, K. T., Cheng, J. C., & Chan, C. M. (2020). Simulation optimisation towards energy efficient green buildings: Current status and future trends. Journal of Cleaner Production, 254, 120012.
- Geyer, P. (2012). Systems modelling for sustainable building design. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 26(4), 656-668. doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2012.04.005
- Göçer, Ö., Hua, Y., & Göçer, K. (2015). Completing the missing link in building design process: Enhancing post-occupancy evaluation method for effective feedback for building performance. Building and Environment, 89, 14-27.
- González, J. S., Rodriguez, A. G. G., Mora, J. C., Santos, J. R., & Payan, M. B. (2010). Optimization of wind farm turbines layout using an evolutive algorithm. Renewable energy, 35(8), 1671-1681.
- Huang, B., Lei, J., Ren, F., Chen, Y., Zhao, Q., Li, S., Lin, Y., 2021. Contribution and obstacle analysis of applying BIM in promoting green buildings. Journal of Cleaner Production. 278, 123946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123946.
- Hussain, R, Pedro, A, Lee, D, Pham, C & Park, C 2018, ‘Impact of safety training and interventions on training-transfer: Targeting migrant construction workers’, International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, vol. 3548.
- Jain, N., Burman, E., Stamp, S., Mumovic, D., & Davies, M. (2020). Cross-sectoral assessment of the performance gap using calibrated building energy performance simulation. Energy and Buildings, 224, 110271. doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110271
- JKR & CIDB 2016a, MyCrest - A Reference Guide for Malaysian Carbon Reduction and Environmental Sustainability Tool (Version 1.0): Design Stage Certification, viewed 11 November 2021,
- Kamari, A., Schultz, C. P. L., & Kirkegaard, P. H. (2019). Constraint-based renovation design support through the renovation domain model. Automation in construction, 104, 265-280. doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2019.04.023
- Khoshdelnezamiha, G., Liew, S. C., Shin Bong, V. N., & Ong, D. E. L. (2020). Evaluation of BIM application for water efficiency assessment. Journal of Green Building, 15(4), 91-115. doi.org/10.3992/jgb.15.4.91
- Kiamili, C., Hollberg, A., & Habert, G. (2020). Detailed assessment of embodied carbon of HVAC systems for a new office building based on BIM. Sustainability, 12(8), 3372.
- Krygiel, E & Nies, B 2008 Green BIM: Successful sustainable design with building information modeling, Ist., Indianapolis, Indiana: Wiley., Indiana, USA.
- Lai, H., Deng, X., & Chang, T. Y. P. (2019). BIM-based platform for collaborative building design and project management. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 33(3), 05019001. doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000830
- Lai, Huahui; Deng, Xueyuan; Chang, Tse-Yung P. (2019). BIM-Based Platform for Collaborative Building Design and Project Management. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 33(3), 05019001–. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000830
- Li, Y., Roy, U. & Saltz, J.S. Towards an integrated process model for new product development with data-driven features (NPD3). Res Eng Design 30, 271–289 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-019-00308-6
- Liu, Z., Lu, Y., Shen, M., & Peh, L. C. (2021). Transition from building information modeling (BIM) to integrated digital delivery (IDD) in sustainable building management: A knowledge discovery approach based review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 291, 125223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125223
- Lu, Y., Wu, Z., Chang, R. and Li, Y., 2017. Building Information Modeling (BIM) for green buildings: A critical review and future directions. Automation in Construction, Vol. 83, pp.134-148. doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.08.024
- Lyu, C., Hu, J., Zhang, R., Chen, W., & Xu, P. (2023). Optimizing the evaluation model of green building management based on the concept of urban ecology and environment. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 10, 1094535.
- Manzoor, B., Othman, I., Gardezi, S. S. S., Altan, H., & Abdalla, S. B. (2021). BIM-based research framework for sustainable building projects: a strategy for mitigating BIM implementation barriers. Applied Sciences, 11(12), 5397.
- Marzouk, M., & Thabet, R. (2023). A BIM-Based Tool for Assessing Sustainability in Buildings Using the Green Pyramid Rating System. Buildings, 13(5), 1274.
- Mayer, R, Menzel, C, Painter, M, Blinn, T & Perakaith, B 1995, Information Integration for Concurrent Engineering (IICE) IDEF3 Process Description Capture Method Report, Knowledge Based Systems Inc.
- Melo, A.C.S., Braga, A.E., Leite, C.D.P. et al. Frameworks for reverse logistics and sustainable design integration under a sustainability perspective: a systematic literature review. Res Eng Design 32, 225–243 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-020-00351-8
- Ohueri, C. C. (2022). The Integrated BIM-MyCREST Process Model for Reengineering the Green Building Design Practices. A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Civil Engineering (Construction Management). Faculty of Engineering, Computing, and Science. Swinburne University of Technology
- Ohueri, C.C., Enegbuma, W.I., Kuok, K.K., Wong, N.M., Ng, L.T. and Kenley, R. (2019). Preliminary evaluation of synergizing BIM and Malaysian carbon reduction and environmental sustainability tool. In P. Kaparaju, R. Howlett, J. Littlewood, C. Ekanyake and L. Vlacic (eds.), KES-SEB 2018: Sustainability in Energy and Buildings 2018. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, Vol. 131. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 218–227.
- Razmi, A., Rahbar, M., & Bemanian, M. (2022). PCA-ANN integrated NSGA-III framework for dormitory building design optimization: Energy efficiency, daylight, and thermal comfort. Applied Energy, 305, 117828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117828
- Rea Minango, N., Maffei, A. Beyond assembly features: systematic review of the core concepts and perspectives towards a unified approach to assembly information representation. Res Eng Design 34, 3–38 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-022-00400-4
- Sanvido, V. E., & Norton, K. J. (1994). Integrated design-process model. Journal of Management in Engineering, 10(5), 55-62. doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)9742-597X(1994)10:5(55)
- Seghier, T. E., Lim, Y. W., Harun, M. F., Ahmad, M. H., Samah, A. A., & Majid, H. A. (2022). BIM-based retrofit method (RBIM) for building envelope thermal performance optimization. Energy and Buildings, 256, 111693. doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2021.111693
- Sekaran, U & Bougie, R 2016, Research Method for Businesses, Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
- Semaan, J., Underwood, J., & Hyde, J. (2021). An investigation of work-based education and training needs for effective BIM adoption and implementation: an organisational upskilling model. Applied Sciences, 11(18), 8646.https://doi.org/10.3390/app11188646
- Senaratne, Sepani; Ruwanpura, Manori (2016). Communication in construction: a management perspective through case studies in Sri Lanka. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 12(1), 3–18. doi:10.1080/17452007.2015.1056721
- Shen, Y., & Pan, Y. (2023). BIM-supported automatic energy performance analysis for green building design using explainable machine learning and multi-objective optimization. Applied Energy, 333, 120575.
- Srivastava, A., Singh, P., Janhavi, N. N., & Singh, A. (2017). Green Buildings: Eco-friendly Technique for Modern Cities. Sustainable Smart Cities in India: Challenges and Future Perspectives, 415-432.
- Stride, M., Hon, C. K., Liu, R., & Xia, B. (2020). The use of building information modelling by quantity surveyors in facilities management roles. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(8), 1795-1812.doi:10.1108/ECAM-11-2019-0660
- Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: A research and delivery foundation for industry stakeholders. Automation in construction, 18(3), 357-375.//doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2008.10.003
- Succar, B., & Poirier, E. (2020). Lifecycle information transformation and exchange for delivering and managing digital and physical assets. Automation in Construction, 112, 103090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103090
- Wu, W., & Issa, R. R. (2015). BIM execution planning in green building projects: LEED as a use case. Journal of Management in Engineering, 31(1), A4014007. doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000314.
- Wu, X., Cao, Y., Liu, W., He, Y., Xu, G., Chen, Z. S., ... & Skibniewski, M. J. (2023). BIM-driven building greenness evaluation system: An integrated perspective drawn from model data and collective experts’ judgments. Journal of Cleaner Production, 136883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136883
- Zahedi, A., Abualdenien, J., Petzold, F., & Borrmann, A. (2022). BIM-based design decisions documentation using design episodes, explanation tags, and constraints. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 27, 756-780.DOI: 10.36680/j.itcon.2022.037
- Zanni, M., Ruikar, K. and Soetanto, R. (2020), "Systematising multidisciplinary sustainable building design processes utilising BIM", Built Environment Project and Asset Management, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 637-655. doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-05-2020-0088
- Zhao, C., Liu, M., & Wang, K. (2022). Monetary valuation of the environmental benefits of green building: A case study of China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 365, 132704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132704
No competing interests reported.
- Appendix.docx
Appendix Green BIM Process Model Information Requirements